dable plans of Philip; and it will be well if all the arguments of the most perfuafive writers can excite in this, and other nations, a conftant and an active vigilance to baffle the ambitious fchemes of Ruffia. To this object a great part of Alfred's Letters is directed, and we cannot but confider the attempt as highly meritorious.

f

a

In the opinion of this writer, Oczakow was peculiarly important to the Emprefs of the Ruffias, not only as, in her own eftimation, the key to the Crimea, the means of fecuring the progrefs of her fhips from Cherfon, and of commencing with advantage any attack upon the Turks; but alfo as a complete check, both military and commercial, upon Poland. The acquifition of it he confiders as the step to all thofe violent meafures of Ruffia against that country, which Europe has fince viewed with astonishment, and profound regret. On the correctness of thofe opinions we do not undertake to pronotince; but the question is undoubtedly of the greatest moment, and deferves to be inveftigated to the utmost. In every country where the operations of the state are in any great degree controuled by the influence of public opinion, the diffufion of right knowledge, on fubjects that materially affect the general intereft, is of the very first expediency. Unhappily this inftruction frequently arrives too late to prevent errors, and confequent misfortunes: but even tardy knowledge has its ufe, and may preclude at least a repetition of evils. For this reafon we earnestly with to fee every particular concerning the relative interefts of this country and Ruffia examined difpaffionately, in all points of view, and purfued, if poffible, to the very point of truth. A great deal to this effect is performed in Alfred's Letters, if not fo as to preclude reply from those who favour a different fyftem, certainly fo as to demand much attention.

Some ftrong delineations of character occur in thefe Letters: that of the Emperor Jofeph II. in the 14th letter, is ably executed; but that of Leopold II. as much lefs generally known, we fhall prefer to extract by way of fpecimen:

"He poffeffed the rare and almoft peculiar felicity, of having for many years been accustomed to the management of public affairs, without having in any degree disclosed the nature of his talents, of the tendency of his difpofition. He had lived at Florence the father, the friend, and even the companion of his people. At a distance from the busy and intricate scene of political intrigue, his conduct of negotiations had not been tried, nor had any opportunity occurred of criticizing his military abilities. Attentive to the minuteft details of government; ftrenuous in his endeavours to reform what he conceived to be domeftic abuses; equitable and frugal, though fometimes capricious and fevere, he had acquired the reputation of a

worthy

worthy man, whofe heart was better than his head; whofe integrity and honour might be depended upon, but whofe talents were inadequate to the arduous encounter of rival cabinets, where a fuperiority of intellectual powers was (is) fo frequently manifested over the nobler workings of candour and virtue.

"Under fuch a mask, and to be developed only by a fucceffion of events, did the character of Leopold appear. As thofe events occurred, and they did fo with a rapidity scarcely equalled in the annals of history, his real features were gradually disclosed. Supple and accommodating to the circumftances of the moment; rapidly embracing the caufes and the confequences of things; ftrenuous where he perceived the weakness or the apprehenfions of his antagonift, and yielding with addrefs to a fuperior power; prodigal of his promises, and unbounded in his conceffions, but ever referving fome fecret opening for evafion, he boldly entered into the lifts of political intrigue, and dared to measure his weapons with tried diplomatic champions. Perfectly aware of the vantage ground on which he stood, and sheltering himself behind the mistaken character which he had brought with him into Germany, he gave free fcope to the latent powers of his mind." Letter 16.

The remainder of that letter applies the proof of facts to this character, by a rapid view of the great and multifarious objects he was able to embrace, and manage with fuccefs, within a year from his acceffion to the empire. In the 33d and 37th Letters, are fome arguments very ftrongly oppofed to those fallacious declamations which are fo eafily made upon the common-place topic of the bleffings of peace; pointing out, that war may be occafionally a duty; and, though undoubtedly an evil in itself, may be, in certain circumftances, a much fmaller evil than an inglorious or fallacious tranquillity.

The political merits of these Letters we leave to statesmen to difcufs. Exclufively of the points which they may contend to be difputable, it feems to us, that they contain much useful information, In point of compofition, the few blemishes difcoverable in them are clearly overbalanced by the general excellence of the ftyle; and are, in our opinion, fully excufed by the apology inferted in the concluding letter, that they were written in "hafte, and under the preffure of many other avocations."

When we have objected to dominant, in p. 14, refiftless for unrefifting, in p. 30, and arrondiffement, in p. 31, we have exhausted our chief rage as verbal critics. About as many cenfures we might be inclined to pafs on particular phrases, and the turn of a few fentences, which feem indeed to argue hafte, but might be pardoned even without that plea. After making fuch flight exceptions, we declare ourselves, as critics, highly pleafed. A few errors of the prefs require correction: fuch as United nations" for Provinces, in p. 64. The omiffion of

a negative, in p. 121. 1. 19. and the mistake of the numeral mark prefixed to Letter 29, which is printed 31.

It will hardly be objected to us, that we have given a more particular notice to these Letters than their oftenfible origin, the channel of a newspaper, entitles them to claim; and the objection will least of all occur to thofe, who, like ourselves, fhall read them with minute attention.

ART. XV. The Plays of William Shakspeare, in 15 Volumes, with the Corrections and Illustrations of various Commentators. To which are added Notes, by Samuel Johnfon and George Steevens. The 4th Edition. Revifed and augmented with a Gloffarial Index by the Editor of Dodfley's Collection of old Plays. 8vo. 61. 15s. Longman, &c. &c. &c. most of the London bookfellers.

THE fate of Shakspeare has been very fingular. Admired even

3

to enthufiafm by his own uncritical age, which with all its defects had yet the merit of feeling ftrongly the powers of genius; formally configned to oblivion by the would-be critics, the Rymers and the Shaftefburies of a more advanced period; and actually fo neglected, as to be plundered with impunity by any poet, whofe tafte in borrowing exceeded his honesty in confeffing his obligations, he has at length arifen to the complete dignity of a claffic; and that which now lies before us is the fourth impreffion of a conftantly augmented variorum edition. The admiration of the Greeks for Homer is nearly equalled by the zeal of our countrymen for their old dramatic bard; and a republication of his plays, with any important acceffions of criticifm, is not to be overlooked by the periodical historians of our literature. Partaking in the general feelings towards this admirable child of nature, we take up the fubject con amore, and fhall indulge ourfelves, and, we hope, gratify our readers, by enlivening our publication with a few remarks upon this interefting topic, fuggefted by the prefent edition.

More than twenty editions of the plays of Shakspeare, within the prefent century, have not yet exhaufted the labours of criticifm to clear up the difficulties of his phrafeology, and to afcertain the purity of his text: and, from the peculiar circumftances of their original publication, it is not easy to forefee a termination to thefe efforts. Mr. Steevens, whose acuteness and affiduity have been very eminently diftinguished in this fervice, is fully aware of what is here afferted, and instead of flattering himself that he has perfected the task, thus expreffes

his opinion upon it, " Every re-impreffion of our great drama"tic master's works must be confidered as, in fome degree, "experimental; for their corruptions and obfcurities are ftill "fo numerous, and the progrefs of fortunate conjecture fo "tardy and uncertain, that our remote defcendants may be "perplexed by paffages that have perplexed us; and the read"ings which have hitherto difunited the opinions of the "learned, may continue to difunite them as long as England and Shakspeare have a name,'

Yet it must not be denied, that very much has been performed. The modern annotators, and particularly Mr. Steevens, and Mr. Malone, formerly his coadjutor, now a critical antagonift and rival editor, have gone deeply into that fpecies of tudy which alone could fully illuftrate the language of Shakfpeare, the study of the contemporary writers; and have been very diligent in collating and comparing the early editions. The obfcurities and doubts that yet remain, are rather the exercife of critics, than the concern of common readers, who find their general fatisfaction very little interrupted by thofe matters which make enmity among the commentators.

By the divifion of Mr. Malone and Mr. Steevens, we have now two feparate variorum editions; and, to prove the eagernefs of the public for every able illuftration of their favourite, Mr. Malone's edition, published at the latter end of 1790, is faid to be already nearly fold off; and before he can prepare another, this of Mr. Steevens will probably have made way for it, by a difperfion no lefs rapid. The plan of the former is rather more compreffed; within ten volumes of a smaller fize, Mr. Malone has given all the plays, with the fonnets, and other poems. The prefent edition, the first of this kind that has been recommended by elegance of type and fplendor of paper, is extended, partly by thofe circumftances, to 15 volumes, comprehending only the plays, and their elucidations. As to the fonnets, &c. Mr. Steevens protefts against reprinting them, becaufe, as he tells us, "the strongest act of parliament that "could be framed would fail to compel readers into their fer"vice." In preference to them he recommends the fonnets of Thomas Watfon, an elder and more elegant fonneteer," with whom we should be happy to have more acquaintance. He has escaped the notice of Headley, and other compilers of old poems, and, we believe, of Warton.

Moft of the new matter contained in Mr. Malone's late edition is to be found alfo in this; because these critics, liberal even in their difunion, allow each other to confider every thing produced by either as the common property of both. As they differ in feveral points of opinion, this liberty is generally productive of further augmentation; the positions of one

E 4

being

being feldom ftated, without fomething by way of reply from the other. With alternate efforts they beat the anvil of cri ticifm, and many lucid fparks are driven out by the collision of their ftrokes.

To give our readers as clear a notion as we can of what this publication offers, and thereby to affift their deliberations on the important queftion of the purchase, we will take a curfory view of the contents; fubjoining our remarks.

The two first volumes confift of Prolegomena, of which the particulars are,

1. Mr. Steevens's advertisement, on the appearance of the prefent edition. The editor having his mind well ftored with Shaksperian phrases, here bestows rather more than a sufficiency of them upon his readers; a redundancy of wit is fometimes almost as fatiguing as dulnefs itfelf; and it is, perhaps, a fault the more obvious to the eyes of Reviewers, as it is one into which they are not very likely to fall.

We confefs ourselves unwilling to admit the arguments here adduced, to prove that there is no refemblance of the face of Shakspeare extant it is unpleafing to give up the supposed acquaintance we have with his features. Mr. Malone, it is probable, will not tamely abandon the picture in the poffeffion of the Chandos family, from which he has a copy by Sir Joshua Reynolds; who never, as far as we can learn, complained that the original from which he took it was "the "fhadow of a shade." We cannot help fancying a likeness between the lineaments of that head, and the coarfer reprefentation by Martin Droefhout; and think that Jonfon would not fo ftudioufly have dwelt upon the hitting of the likeness in that print, had it been entirely miffed. Having his verses to make, and to addrefs to perfons who remembered Shakspeare himfelf, why should he have said,

"O could he but have drawn his wit,

"As well in bràfs as he hath hit

"His face,"

if the face had not been hit at all?

Mr. Steevens next expreffes his doubts of the relationship of Sir William Davenant to our bard, grounding much of his disbelief on the dulnefs and heavy afpect of the knight. This point we are not equally difpofed to conteft. In weightier matters, there thould perhaps be more evidence required than has yet been produced for that relationship.

But the great point of difference between Mr. Malone and Mr. Steevens is on the fubject of the comparative value of the 1ft and 2d folio editions of Shakspeare; the latter of which Mr. M. afferts